LAST week I received a call from a learned colleague from Bayelsa State seeking my assistance in securing the release of a friend of his detained in one of the police divisions in Delta State in connection with tenancy matters.
On getting to the police station, I met the “suspect” whose “offence” was that he refunded the rent to his tenant and agreed with him (tenant) to quit at the end of August 2024 having found some of the conduct of the tenant very uncomfortable.
The landlord in the expectation that the tenant would quit as agreed, collected rent from an incoming tenant who accordingly would pack in on 1st September 2024.
However, the old tenant, despite being refunded his rent and the agreement to quit at the end of the month, did not quit as agreed thereby making it practically impossible for the incoming tenant to take possession.
The incoming tenant felt aggrieved and quickly reported the matter to the police, who with the speed of lightening arrested the landlord and detained him for three days.
That was not all, the detained landlord was asked to deposit to the police the money he collected from the incoming tenant which the police will subsequently hand over to the complainant or he would remain in police detention.
It took a legal intervention before the landlord was released on bail after spending three days in detention for a purely civil matter for reason best known to the police, the tenant whose rent was refunded but refused to quit was not arrested until counsel for the detained landlord demanded to know the where about of the recalcitrant
As if that was not enough, few days later the landlord was again told to come with the money to be refunded to the incoming tenant or he will go back to the cell. He subsequently reported at the station and the prospective tenant insisted that landlord be detained until the police recovered the money he (incoming tenant) paid to the landlord.
However, the landlord was later released and given a three-week deadline to come and deposit the money with the police for onward transmission to the tenant.
The above scenario where police arrogates to itself the power of civil dispute resolution though a common place occurrence in Nigeria is unlawful and totally unacceptable.
Civil disputes are completely outside the powers, rights and reach of the Nigeria Police Force and indeed any other law enforcement agency in Nigeria. It is equally wrong for a tenant or landlord or any person for that matter to engage the services of Police officers in a civil matter as both the police officers involved and the person that invited the police officers can be sued for breach of fundamental human rights if victims of such engagement of security operatives for a civil matter.
Even if a civil cause has some criminal contents, Police Officers must restrict themselves to the criminal aspect only as parties are under the law at liberty to seek proper legal advice on the civil contents. This can be gleaned for instance, from the case of OKAFOR & ANOR V. AIG POLICE ZONE II ONIKAN & ORS (2019) LPELR- 46505 where the court held thus” When, as in the circumstances of this action, a purely civil matter is reported to the Police, such a person cannot go scot-free as the report ought not to have been made at all since it is not within the purview of Police duties. It is a report made malafide and he will be equally liable for the action taken by the Police irrespective of whether he actively instigated them or not, since he had no business involving the Police in a purely civil matter in the first place. Such conduct which portrays disregard of the law and is aimed at using the coercive powers of the State to punish a contracting party in a purely civil matter ought to be mulcted in exemplary damages”
Even in criminal matters that police handle, it is not the law that police will go into making final decisions on a matter reported before it such as asking a suspect to pay money to a nominal complainant in a contractual dispute. All that the law requires the police to do when a matter is reported is to investigate and charge the matter to court if there is a reasonable ground for that. If there is no reasonable ground for taking the matter to court, or the matter is civil in nature, the suspect should be released from custody forthwith by deciding and ordering a suspect to pay the complainant some money subject of dispute is analogous to usurping the role of the court which has the constitutional right to deliver judgment after hearing and putting evidence on the imaginary scale of justice. It is therefore illegal, null and void for any person, organization or group of persons to arrogate to itself non -existent powers.
For the avoidance of doubt, let the police and persons who engage security operatives generally for civil dispute resolutions that the courts have at all material times deprecated this descent to unmitigated lawlessness and unwarranted affront on the rule of law.
For instance, in the case of NWADIUGWU v. IGP & ORS (2015) LPELR-26027(CA), the court has this to say “(Police Officers) are neither debt collectors nor Arbitrators and Section 24 of the Police Act 2004 does not list settlement of disputes or collection of debts amongst the duties of the Police”
Again in IBIYEYE V. GOLD (2012) ALL FWLR (PT 659) 1074, the court observed thus“As I went through the facts of this case, I was wondering how a purely civil matter could easily metamorphose and transubstantiate into a purely criminal case. The end result now is that the Appellant has suffered irreparable damage, disgrace, shame, odiousness and untold hardship in the hand of the Police that is constitutionally and legally saddled with prosecution of criminal offences. The police have muzzled the rights and freedom of Nigerians even where cases are clearly outside their jurisdiction, power or corridor. If this is not curbed, everybody including the judicial officers will suffer always from floodgates of civil matters being hijacked by the police and transmuted into crimes. If this is not tackled, everybody would have suffered in the merciless hands of the police who have become law unto themselves in this country. The primary duty of the Police by Sectiin 4 of the police Act is the prevention of crime, investigation and detection of crime and the prosecution of offenders”
This scope of power for the police has not been expanded and should remain as it is until enlarged.
Any citizen that has any issue to ventilate should consult a lawyer for necessary legal advice.
It is very important that people should stop dragging the police into civil matters.
